Timeline for How much context is the required minimum?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 2020 at 13:09 | history | edited | CommunityBot | Commonmark migration | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:35 | comment | added | Mast Mod | A lot of code posted isn't actually production code @Malachi | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:34 | comment | added | FreezePhoenix | @Malachi Who said it was production code? | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:32 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | that would be some weird production code, wouldn't it? | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:29 | comment | added | FreezePhoenix | Code only questions could be acceptable if comments in the code take the place of the text that would be in the question body. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:19 | comment | added | Peilonrayz Mod | @Malachi UCWYA is for text only, and the lacks concrete context close reason is about the code. You're trying to bundle them into the same, where we're just talking code. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:18 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | I have unfrozen Discuss Close Reasons chat room for this conversation. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:17 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | Take DI, with the entire purpose to ease defining the 'what'. before that you said that the code defines the what and the how. where do we draw that line? | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:15 | comment | added | Peilonrayz Mod | @Malachi Where did I say code only? You are saying only text can say what, where code does that too. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:14 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | @Peilonrayz now we are wandering into code only questions...I don't think we want that for Code Review. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:12 | comment | added | Peilonrayz Mod | @Malachi Code defines the what and the how. Take DI, with the entire purpose to ease defining the 'what'. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:09 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | Context is --> the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:09 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | Context is more "what" than "how", the code says how. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:07 | comment | added | FreezePhoenix | I would catagorize stub code as the lack of context, because it doesn't show all that is being used or done / directed. But, I see what you mean, and realize that your 'lack of context' means little to no explanation, and/or not telling what the code does, and/or not telling how the code would be used/ when it would be used, and/or why it should be used. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:04 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | that is not lack of Context, @FreezePhoenix. please see --> codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3652/18427 under stub code | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 14:00 | comment | added | FreezePhoenix | I think we should draw the line at putting dots in your code to show that there is code not being included, or when you include a non-standard library / module that may behave differently than expected. Both show lack of context that would be undoubtably wrong. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:58 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | that is not a context issue, that is one of the other 4 reasons inside that close reason, I would say that there is code missing that is needed, I may call that "stub" code or something similar, @hoffmale | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:54 | comment | added | hoffmale | My problem is: How can you tell that the code in question does what it is intended to do if the core logic is either in external parts or depending heavily on them? (Especially if those external parts are not a publicly available library, i.e. just another part of the same project). | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:48 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | "What is your code doing for your application" that is the context of the code, the rest of the close reason speaks to how much code that you need. this close reason is a mesh of several close reasons because we can only have so many custom close reasons. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:42 | comment | added | Peilonrayz Mod | @Malachi When a user thinks something along the lines of: "I know the language, and I understand the libraries being used. And I've included enough to understand my code. This is not off-topic". | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:40 | comment | added | Malachi Mod | what precedent? I am not following | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:39 | comment | added | Peilonrayz Mod | @Vogel612 I think so in the same way that 'broken code' was bad, it sets a precedent which isn't true for the OP and they get needlessly annoyed. | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:30 | comment | added | Vogel612 Mod | @Mast is that bad? | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:26 | comment | added | Mast Mod | Isn't that still quite open to interpretation? | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 13:19 | history | answered | MalachiMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |